Mike Moran: So much for self-sufficiency, Fall River

Wednesday

Jun 4, 2014 at 2:37 PM

Self-sufficiency is an idea that lots of politicians hold in high regard. They make speeches about it all the time. We need to determine our own fate and be less reliant on others, they say. It's a popular message.

Mike MoranHerald News Columnist

Self-sufficiency is an idea that lots of politicians hold in high regard. They make speeches about it all the time. We need to determine our own fate and be less reliant on others, they say. It’s a popular message.

Elected leaders, and the candidates who try to replace them during election season, frequently recite the mantra of independence from outside forces. In Fall River, we’ve heard this idea expressed time and time again. It’s based on the flimsy premise that the powerful people in Boston and Washington give us very little. It’s flimsy because cities like Fall River qualify for lots of state and federal assistance, and they always have.

In a typical year, about half of Fall River’s municipal budget is comprised of state funds. And when you’re stuck in traffic at one of the city’s many road and bridge construction sites, let your thoughts wander to the state and federal dollars that are making those improvements happen. If we were entirely self-sufficient, as so many politicians claim we should be, there wouldn’t be a bridge under your tires. Even more money from some of these same sources is routinely delivered without fanfare.

Yet many still sing the song of self-sufficiency. After Fall River received its final SAFER grant award to keep the Fire Department adequately funded, Mayor Will Flanagan said we have to to “self-fund the Fire Department in order to not be reliant on federal grants in the future.” Councilor Linda Pereira agreed. “We need to develop a plan to be self-sufficient,” she said at the time.

Countless other would-be politicians have hitched their wagons to the self-sufficiency notion. A couple of years ago, mayoral candidate Richard Renzi said he wanted to cut all financial ties with Boston, claiming that it would take 30 or 40 years to do so. Fascinating!

All this self-sufficiency came to mind again last week as the City Council and the Flanagan administration engaged in the latest round of tug-of-war over the municipal budget. It seems the council is reluctant to grant a modest water and sewer rate increase this year, something that Councilor Dan Rego admits is “not a heavy lift.” Still it appears too heavy for Rego and four of his colleagues.

Terry Sullivan, the city’s administrator of public utilities, is requesting the increase in order to prevent the layoff of 19 staff persons as well as the inevitable intervention of the state’s Department of Environmental Protection. Say goodbye to self-sufficiency if that happens.

Yes, I know there’s a brewing controversy about a possible six-figure EPA fine hanging over the city’s head right now. Should that become reality, it will not help Sullivan’s cause, or his budget for that matter. And it will be even harder for his department to meet mandated federal requirements if his staff numbers are slashed by the action of a stubborn council.

When an underperforming school risks the possibility of state takeover, we find it completely unacceptable. Politicians condemn the idea in no uncertain terms and vow that they will not let it happen. Communities that can’t properly handle their finances flirt dangerously with state receivership, something that occurred in Fall River in 1931, lasting 10 years. Never again, we cry.

Why then are some members of the City Council holding their breath until they turn blue on Sullivan’s request and, in the process, may be paving the way for state control of the water and sewer departments? If self-sufficiency is so important, why are some councilors so easily willing to let it slip through their hands? It’s politics, that’s why.

The majority of city councilors are becoming increasingly disenchanted with the mayor and his administration. That’s their right and their displeasure may be somewhat justified. Still, emotion may rule the day on the water and sewer rate issue and political payback could be the council majority’s top priority. Some may take pleasure in putting one over on the mayor. But they, and we who pay for city services, will certainly live to regret that choice.